Egregoros

Signal feed

API Docs

Caleb James DeLisle

@cjd@pkteerium.xyz

Badges
Don't Follow Me.
(See pinned post)

DeltaChat: https://i.delta.chat/#264A83F799BAF5CF69C40458470CA249A934D52C&a=tr45n%40testrun.org&n=Caleb%20James%20DeLisle&i=uLlfN5-_gjz&s=DBZqw9n-hrV

43

Posts

0

Followers

0

Following

Posts

Latest notes

Caleb James DeLisle

Caleb James DeLisle

@cjd@pkteerium.xyz remote
Open link
There are versions of this which were blatantly obvious at the beginning of the Russia/Ukraine war.

The propagandists were shouting "UKRAINE IS WINNING, ONLY A FEW MORE WEEKS", and the (generally pretty well respected) western geopolitical analysts were more-or-less repeating it.

To the extent that I imagine some fairly large boomer retirement plans did at least a few investment transactions under the assumption that Russia was not going to last more than a year.

The beast has no eyes and no ears...
Caleb James DeLisle

Caleb James DeLisle

@cjd@pkteerium.xyz remote
Open link
Sure, but chips are still being made. There may be one fab which is very backed up, or even not running at capacity, but it's not like we've "lost the technology".

If we ever get to the point where there are no fabs operating (won't happen IMO), photoresist, metal deposition stuff, etc will all be unobtanium.
Caleb James DeLisle

Caleb James DeLisle

@cjd@pkteerium.xyz remote
Open link
Interesting, I wouldn't mind knowing what materials were said to work most effectively...

BTW: Asymmetrical capacitors (one plate larger than the other) come up in 3 different unexplained technologies:

1. Townsend Brown thrusters (of course)
2. Orgone accumulators (layers of conducting and insulating material create an asymmetry because outside layers are necessarily larger)
3. Stanley Meyer electrolyzer (look at the design, it's tube-in-tube)
Caleb James DeLisle

Caleb James DeLisle

@cjd@pkteerium.xyz remote
Open link
> she'd sit in the box for hours a day instead of talking to him

So, depending on your definition of "work".... 😏

BTW: Exposing yourself to high doses of orgone is probably not a great idea - effects are not well understood. I seem to recall in the cancer-mouse experiments, the mice lived a bit longer but the cancer thrived a lot more.
Caleb James DeLisle

Caleb James DeLisle

@cjd@pkteerium.xyz remote
Open link
> people are always selling orgone pyramids

AFAIK those pyramids are not orgone accumulators in any original sense of the term. What you need to fit Reich's design is a container made of alternating layers of conductive and insulating material, and you get an accumulation inside of this container.
Caleb James DeLisle

Caleb James DeLisle

@cjd@pkteerium.xyz remote
Open link
There's a ton of simple boring stuff like the T.T. Brown capacitor we were discussing earlier. Also gyroscopes lose weight, but only if they're spinning in one direction, not the other. Also gravity decreases during an eclipse, etc etc etc... Easy to reproduce.

Then you have the cold fusion stuff which really makes people crazy. There's so many things out there and there's no theoretical foundation for any of it, these guys just keep trying random things and randomly it will do something unexpected, but then it'll stop and nobody can explain any of it. You hear these guys talk and you can see that it just drove them mad.
Caleb James DeLisle

Caleb James DeLisle

@cjd@pkteerium.xyz remote
Open link

Then you've got Wilhelm Reich, and the whole Orgone thing. There's this one experiment, thermal anomaly, which has been reproduced over and over, and nobody can explain it. If you follow his theories, that stuff is a real mindfuck, but at the heart of it, there is at least one or two experiments that can't be explained...

Caleb James DeLisle

Caleb James DeLisle

@cjd@pkteerium.xyz remote
Open link
Physics is LOADED with these inconvenient little party tricks that are not really useful for anything, but also cannot be explained by anyone in the mainstream orthodoxy.

If you like to troll, just memorize them and bring them up whenever you meet a physicist...
Caleb James DeLisle

Caleb James DeLisle

@cjd@pkteerium.xyz remote
Open link
You're looking in the wrong places.

Here's a dumb simple reproduction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=006d36WWyaQ

That is NOT an ionic thruster, it's a Townsend Brown thruster, we know very well how to make them but we lack the physics to understand why they work - and how to make them produce *useful* amounts of thrust.

Paper about them: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20040171929/downloads/20040171929.pdf

"they work, we don't know why"

Wikipedos mumbling about ions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biefeld%E2%80%93Brown_effect
(It's been proven that it is not ions.)

Dr. Charles Buhler (NASA electrostatics guru) started a company called Exodus to try to commercialize the thrusters for low thrust satellite applications. Video: Him commenting on the major physics issue with the fact that the thrusters don't actually require power in order to work.
Caleb James DeLisle

Caleb James DeLisle

@cjd@pkteerium.xyz remote
Open link
There's another issue with these thrusters which opens a MASSIVE can of worms:

They don't push against anything - they've been tested in sealed containers inside of vacuum chambers and there's nothing being thrown off and nothing being pushed against.

That means, if they produce 1 gram of thrust at "rest" (there's no such thing as "stationary" in a universal sense), they also produce the same thrust at any speed...

That's a Problem for physics, because if you make one spin around in a circle, the faster it spins, the more power it generates (same torque, more RPM), so basically it's a backdoor into Free Energy...

Currently does not work in any meaningful way because the thrust they produce is so small that you can't get them to spin fast enough to extract meaningful power (the structure can't handle the centrifugal force). But they do create theoretical free energy which is at least enough to troll the shit out of physicists...